If you go into a US bar which is a fan of X sport team and say "LOL X TEAM SUCKED LAST NIGHT OMG Z OWNED THEM" and then you get punched in the face and kicked out of the bar.

How is that any more acceptable than banning someone for being an insulting dudebro from an online forum (which might not even be hosted in an USian place).

Well not fully aware of US law but i am guessing assaulting someone's FACE is considered a crime regardless of whether the bar is private or public.
Last i checked bars don't have "don't say bad shit about our team or you will get punched in the nose" xD

If you go into a US bar which is a fan of X sport team and say "LOL X TEAM SUCKED LAST NIGHT OMG Z OWNED THEM" and then you get punched in the face and kicked out of the bar.

How is that any more acceptable than banning someone for being an insulting dudebro from an online forum (which might not even be hosted in an USian place).

Well not fully aware of US law but i am guessing assaulting someone's FACE is considered a crime regardless of whether the bar is private or public.
Last i checked bars don't have "don't say bad shit about our team or you will get punched in the nose" xD

Well from loads of USians I've talked to, then generally it seems if you're an idiot and go to a place which is a huge fan of something, then bad mouth their team, then the police won't do shit if you get beat up. There's certain unwritten rules of, "Don't piss off the other team."

At very least they will eject you from the bar if you've pissed them off. If you get ejected from a private building because of what you said, then is that always a violation of your whatever amendment?_________________- explanation of feminism -

If you go into a US bar which is a fan of X sport team and say "LOL X TEAM SUCKED LAST NIGHT OMG Z OWNED THEM" and then you get punched in the face and kicked out of the bar.

How is that any more acceptable than banning someone for being an insulting dudebro from an online forum (which might not even be hosted in an USian place).

Well not fully aware of US law but i am guessing assaulting someone's FACE is considered a crime regardless of whether the bar is private or public.
Last i checked bars don't have "don't say bad shit about our team or you will get punched in the nose" xD

Well from loads of USians I've talked to, then generally it seems if you're an idiot and go to a place which is a huge fan of something, then bad mouth their team, then the police won't do shit if you get beat up. There's certain unwritten rules of, "Don't piss off the other team."

At very least they will eject you from the bar if you've pissed them off. If you get ejected from a private building because of what you said, then is that always a violation of your whatever amendment?

Well it IS a 'private building" so i guess it's within their right.
Of course if the owner isn't the one doing the throwing but the patrons, some lawsuit is sure to follow that you can win.
Sue for assault, or something and get a nice settlement with the bastard.

Joined: 01 May 2007Posts: 1080Location: in that cool mountain air, on an appalachian trail

Posted: Wed May 01, 2013 8:09 pm Post subject:

cleocatra wrote:

crayven wrote:

cleocatra wrote:

If you go into a US bar which is a fan of X sport team and say "LOL X TEAM SUCKED LAST NIGHT OMG Z OWNED THEM" and then you get punched in the face and kicked out of the bar.

How is that any more acceptable than banning someone for being an insulting dudebro from an online forum (which might not even be hosted in an USian place).

Well not fully aware of US law but i am guessing assaulting someone's FACE is considered a crime regardless of whether the bar is private or public.
Last i checked bars don't have "don't say bad shit about our team or you will get punched in the nose" xD

Well from loads of USians I've talked to, then generally it seems if you're an idiot and go to a place which is a huge fan of something, then bad mouth their team, then the police won't do shit if you get beat up. There's certain unwritten rules of, "Don't piss off the other team."

At very least they will eject you from the bar if you've pissed them off. If you get ejected from a private building because of what you said, then is that always a violation of your whatever amendment?

I'm sorry but this is just wrong. what might just be chalked up to a typical bar fight in other countries usually results in arrests, assault charges, and lawsuits in america.

Ronald wrote:

Arthain wrote:

Just thought I'd throw this out there but sex does actually lighten a person up.

The act of having sex and reaching a climax increases the level of oxytocin and endorphins in the body. This goes for both males and females.

Oxytocin has been well researched and it reduces blood pressure, stress, and comes with other benefits as well. Good for getting rid of minor headaches as it lowers the blood pressure in your brain. High levels of Estrogen actually enhances the effect of oxytocin so this has a greater effect on females than males.

Endorphins as well stimulates a euphoric reaction in an individual that improves mood and can actually be used as a cure for minor headaches as well as it dulls pain.

I don't think that's what the strip was trying to portray but just thought I'd throw it out there that yes, getting laid DOES indeed actually make you a more friendly and light hearted individual because of how the chemicals that are released during the sexual stimulation affect your mind and body.

So how come doctors never write prescriptions for it?

they might not write a prescription for it per se, but there have been several research studies and I have been straight up told by more than one doctor that sex is a really effective remedy for migraine headaches.

Yinello wrote:

stripeypants wrote:

corrective rape is a thing. It is used against lesbians in particular, and in some countries it is not illegal to do. The belief is that women behaving inappropriately are broken and must be re-trained.

There was an article about how lesbian women in Africa get raped by a lot of men so that she'll become straight. It made me want to puke.

not just in africa, this happened to a college friend of mine when she was in high school. it is sickening and unfortunately it is far from uncommon among lesbians.

stripeypants wrote:

knappetroll wrote:

stripeypants wrote:

the further implication is "You need to have sex with me, since I'm right here and made the suggestion" and the further implication is, "I am the heterosexual sex master who can fix you via sex." This is said to women who aren't behaving 'correctly.'

really, you actually think so?

Because if that would be the case, then what about when it's used on someone of the same sex/someone whom the person saying it does not want to have sex with (Which as far as I've seen is the case in the majority of the time this line is used.).

Are you saying that only gay people say this?

I'm pretty sure (s)he's just saying that it is a common expression used between friends in high school and college when one of them is being uptight. obviously this isn't how it's being used in the comic, but it often doesn't have anything to do with sex and is just an idiom for telling someone to chillax.

crayven wrote:

Raal wrote:

I strongly believe it reflects Tat's desire to swing the B&-Hammer

Then That should read the constitution first.
You don't change the world by silencing dissenters - that olny creates division and sweep under the rug the resentment that builds slowly against you.

is the fact that this forum has never had a moderator completely lost on you people?

Dudebro sits at his computer stunned.
Dudebro: B-but, I was only concerned about her bones' health. Vitamin D deficiency is a real problem!_________________"I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess." - The Man's Prayer (The Red Green Show)

Dudebro sits at his computer stunned.
Dudebro: B-but, I was only concerned about her bones' health. Vitamin D deficiency is a real problem!

Actually I seem to recall there is some evidence that this is becoming a HUGE problem in theocratic countries that require women to almost completely cover themselves when they go out.
/Completely off topic sorry.
//WHEE SPAZBRAIN._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Also i thought freedom of speech meant to allow people saying stuff you do not agree with, otherwise it's not really freedom of speech, now is it?

The U.S. Constitution wrote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

1. this explicitly prevents congress from passing laws restricting speech. it says nothing about anyone else putting limits on speech.
2. and of _course_ it's about letting you say or print things other people disagree with, it was a reaction, at least in part, to the british crown forbidding any criticism - but again, it only limits congress. if (for example) you, as a newspaper publisher, want to publish op-eds from only one political party and refuse any submissions from another political party, you can do that. and people from the other political party can get their own paper, and no one can stop them from doing that.

but again, please note - while congress cannot limit freedom of speech, they are not in any way obligated to provide a platform for it, and neither is anyone else. and, as has been pointed out many times here, they are not obligated to protect you from the consequences of expressing your opinion, unless such consequences violate other protections (like, if someone kills you because of your opinions, they have violated your civil right to life, and will be subject to punishment for that).

tl; dr - the first amendment in no way protects your "right" to say whatever you like on someone else's forum._________________aka: neverscared!

Joined: 01 May 2007Posts: 1080Location: in that cool mountain air, on an appalachian trail

Posted: Wed May 01, 2013 9:37 pm Post subject:

my university had "free speech zones" which were the only places where protesting, proselytizing, soapboxing, etc. were permitted. at the time I saw this as an infringement on free speech but it was university property so they could make the rules as they saw fit. plus they were positioned so that anyone exercising their right to free speech in those areas wouldn't disturb students in class. they had had issues with that in the past so just because you have a right doesn't mean you can abuse it and not expect consequences._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

It's become really misandrist and it is disappointing and insulting. There was so much I enjoyed about this strip and most of it is just gone now, replaced by this self-indulgent and utterly predictable material. It's still drawn really well, and there have been some fine stylistic examples (particularly the Sunday strips), but wow the man-bashing continues unabated.

does the definition of misandrist keep changing to fit anything that evangelizes activist feminism

and what morphic tendencies does "man-bashing" have. why do these go all over the place, anyway.